Posted on 02/10/2010 5:17:18 PM PST by freespirited
So says John Lakian, a longtime friend of the supply-side economist and TV host who just signed on as the finance chair of the group trying to draft him into the race against New York's senior senator.
Lakian, a Wall Street financier and two-time unsuccessful candidate (for governor and US Senate) in Massachusetts, said he spoke last week with Kudlow and did not get a feeling from him about a timeline for a decision.
But Lakian doesn't believe there's any rush - even in the face of the $19.3 million war chest on which Schumer is sitting.
"It really is an overwhelming amount of cash," Lakian acknowledged. "But if he picks up a rival like Larry Kudlow...Larry is a very, very well respected economist. He's very popular on Wall Street, very popular from the standpoint of the economic ideology that he believes in, and he would be able to garner very substantial amounts of money very quickly."
"Would he be able to equal Schumer? Of course not. Schumer had a head start, and you can only raise so much, so fast. On the other hand, now corporations can do independent expenditures at a substantial level. I think a lot of corporations in this country - both small and big - would be doing independent expenditures for Larry Kudlow."
Lakian said he doesn't see any reason for Kudlow to give up his show and the national platform it provides until the very last moment before he announces his candidacy - assuming he runs at all - perhaps even as late as April.
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
I just signed the draft for Kudlow. Anyone is better than that scum Schumer.
Kudlow signed this letter which is close to what Samurai describes; at least there is no sign of any upper limit to the immigration that they promote:
http://www.independent.org/issues/article.asp?id=1727
Dear President George W. Bush and All Members of Congress:
People from around the world are drawn to America for its promise of freedom and opportunity. That promise has been fulfilled for the tens of millions of immigrants who came here in the twentieth century.
Throughout our history as an immigrant nation, those who were already here have worried about the impact of newcomers. Yet, over time, immigrants have become part of a richer America, richer both economically and culturally. The current debate over immigration is a healthy part of a democratic society, but as economists and other social scientists we are concerned that some of the fundamental economics of immigration are too often obscured by misguided commentary.
Overall, immigration has been a net gain for American citizens, though a modest one in proportion to the size of our 13 trillion-dollar economy.
Immigrants do not take American jobs. The American economy can create as many jobs as there are workers willing to work so long as labor markets remain free, flexible and open to all workers on an equal basis.
In recent decades, immigration of low-skilled workers may have lowered the wages of domestic low-skilled workers, but the effect is likely to have been small, with estimates of wage reductions for high-school dropouts ranging from eight percent to as little as zero percent.
While a small percentage of native-born Americans may be harmed by immigration, vastly more Americans benefit from the contributions that immigrants make to our economy, including lower consumer prices. As with trade in goods and services, the gains from immigration outweigh the losses. The effect of all immigration on low-skilled workers is very likely positive as many immigrants bring skills, capital and entrepreneurship to the American economy.
Legitimate concerns about the impact of immigration on the poorest Americans should not be addressed by penalizing even poorer immigrants. Instead, we should promote policies, such as improving our education system, that enable Americans to be more productive with high-wage skills.
We must not forget that the gains to immigrants coming to the United States are immense. Immigration is the greatest anti-poverty program ever devised. The American dream is a reality for many immigrants who not only increase their own living standards but who also send billions of dollars of their money back to their families in their home countries—a form of truly effective foreign aid.
America is a generous and open country and these qualities make America a beacon to the world. We should not let exaggerated fears dim that beacon.
And then there’s this from Human Events:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=13639
Kudlow Comes to Brownback’s Defense
by Robert B. Bluey
Posted 03/29/2006 ET
Updated 03/30/2006 ET
CNBC talk-show host Larry Kudlow and I see eye to eye on many issues, but on immigration reform we’ll have to agree to disagree. That became clear yesterday when, on his program, Kudlow confronted my colleague, Terry Jeffrey, about my attack Monday on Sen. Sam Brownback.
Brownback was one of four Republicans on the Judiciary Committee to join with liberal Sen. Teddy Kennedy (D.-Mass.) to pass an amnesty bill disguised as immigration reform. I took the reliably conservative Brownback to task for his vote, writing, “Brownback Can Kiss’08 Run Goodbye.”
Here’s an excerpt of my piece:
Don’t take Sen. Sam Brownback (R.-Kan.) seriously when he talks about running for President in 2008. Brownback’s vote today with Senate Democrats on an amnesty bill should put an end to any remote chance he had at the White House.
Kudlow, noting my column, responded on his blog yesterday with a piece titled “Bravo to Brownback”:
My good friends at Human Events are whacking Sam Brownback’s vote in favor of this pro-growth, sensible immigration reform. “Brownback can kiss ’08 run goodbye” reads one article posted on the Human Events website (while I agree with this crusading conservative newspaper most of the time on issues like tax and budget cuts, pro-life social values and a strong defense, I’m afraid I must part company with them on immigration reform).
My guess is Senator Brownback cast his vote in favor of the three-legged stool in response to humanitarian pleas from Los Angeles Cardinal Mahoney and other church groups and religious organizations who were threatened with criminal penalties by the House bill, even for humanitarian assistance to undocumented workers. Senator Brownback is a religious man (he converted to Catholicism as I did many years ago).
Guess who Kudlow had on yesterday’s show? That’s right, Sam Brownback. Joining him was Terry Jeffrey, whom Kudlow asked about my piece.
Here’s the transcript:
KUDLOW: Senator Brownback, it is good to see you alive and well. I’m trying to find the—where’s the quotation? My favorite crusading conservative newspaper, and I say that not just because Terry Jeffrey is here, but I absolutely love Human Events. But at the top of their Web site this morning, Senator Brownback, and I’ll quote: “Brownback can kiss ‘08 run goodbye.” End quote. Human Events.
Mr. Brownback, logic behind your vote for this immigration reform bill?
Senator SAM BROWNBACK (Republican Kansas): I think it’s the only sensible, practical, conservative way for us to move forward. I mean, if you’re—if you’re an economic conservative, you really want a pro-growth orientation in the policy, and that includes, really, immigration. If you’re a social conservative, you believe in the sanctity of human life, of every human life, no matter who they are or where they’re located. And I think what we did here was strike a balance in increasing enforcement, which is critical. And interior enforcement, which is something that’s been missing quite a bit in the overall program we’ve had in the past. And in dealing with the 11 million undocumented people that are here in the country and the future flow into this economy in a very humane, practical, sensible, way. I—I think this is the type of proposal—but now, Larry, we’re not done. This proposal needs work. It’s going to get work on the Senate floor. We’re a long way from the final product of what we need to do in immigration policy in this country.
KUDLOW: All right, Senator.
Terry Jeffrey, first of all, Mr. Brownback gets my vote because I’m pro-immigration guy. I like comprehensive reform. You don’t. What do you say to Senator Brownback? What’s the beef that your magazine has with the senator?
Mr. TERRY JEFFREY (Human Events Editor): Well, first of all, I like Senator Brownback a great deal and I think he’s very right on a lot of questions, Larry, in that we believe in free speech at Human Events. We have a lot of different voices. That wasn’t my particularly voice, although I do very strongly disagree with Senator Brownback on immigration, particularly on the immigration legislation that came out of his Judiciary Committee yesterday. And I think it’s—it’s a problem on three fronts. First is border security. It’s not clear enough—it’s not clear to me that this bill does enough to actually secure the border of the United States of America, which is the first priority. Second is what is clearly an amnesty for the 11 million or more illegal aliens who are currently in the country. Not only gives them six years of temporary work visa in the United States, but after four years, puts them on a path to become citizens. Up until yesterday, President Bush was saying he wasn’t for that. But Senator Brownback’s bill says after four years, they can start working at a permanent green card, become a citizen of the United States. And on the final score is I do not believe it accords with American values and conservative values to create a permanent guest worker program, which this would, where you bring in people in foreign countries, precisely because they’ll work for a lower wage than an American would, and essentially make them an indentured servant here that doesn’t have the same economic rights as you and me.
Thanks for reading, Larry. We love your show. It’s the best thing on CNBC, and as long as you’re hosting it, we’ll be watching.
Kudlow is of the same ilk as that Mort Kondrake / Fred Barnes Beltway Boys. He may lean conservative financially, but politically he seems liberal as Mort Kondrake.
I’ll give you that he’s not as far to the left as Schumer, but he reeks of being an old time Democrat. To even call him conservative is a stretch at best.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=13639
Kudlow Comes to Brownback’s Defense
Thanks for sending. Larry hasn't changed his tune, from what I've heard in the past few months. I sure hope he can 1) beat Schumer; and 2) find it in his interest not to get in the way of actual immigration reform, which would be enforcing the laws on the books.
I'd also like to see the 1965 Kennedy bill repealed. (Do you suppose that could work retroactively? They do it with our taxes!) One of my main motivations is putting our own teenagers to work. They'll be disasters as young adults if they don't learn the discipline of something besides video games. Minimum wage laws need to go, too. At least we know Larry would be down for that.
I’m sorry, maybe I have an incorrect definition of “open borders.” That, or the definition has expanded to the point where it is meaningless when someone uses it.
One thing, however -- Schumer has no scruples, no principles and will attack Kudlow for publicly admitting a problem with cocaine several years ago, I can almost see the snide ads now.
You cannot be serious! He is Mr. Supply Side!
I’d say it’s more a matter of you having a distinct affinity for open borders.
” If Reagan considered Kudlow worthy of working in his administration ...”
There are thousands of people who work for the executive branch of each administration. They all like to claim that they worked for the President. Larry worked in the Office of Management and Budget. It’s not like he was a Reagan aide.
Oh, I get it. It’s personal with you. Make up anything you want, then.
I’ll give you that he’s not as far to the left as Schumer, but he reeks of being an old time Democrat. To even call him conservative is a stretch at best.Below see extended Kudlow quote from a piece he wrote in Washington Examiner this week. If after reading this you still believe he "reeks of being an old time Democrat" and "to even call him a conservative is a stretch at best," then you have serious issues best left to a psychiatrist or psychologist to deal with. But in the idea that perhaps you have him mixed up with someone else, I post this in hopes you may reconsider your opinion of a very bright light of the conservative movement, imho. Kudlow quote:
Washington just doesn't get it.Inside the Beltway, Democrats are sending a profoundly pessimistic message that only government knows best. But out there in the heartland there is an optimistic message that We the People know best. And that heartland optimism will not be stopped.
...
This is a moment for the GOP to send a message that it is the party of growth through across-the-board reductions in marginal tax rates -- for everyone. That includes large and small businesses, along with all individuals and families. All producers and investors should get lower tax rates. At a bare minimum, Republicans should be fighting hard to extend the George W. Bush tax cuts on the way to a longer-term goal of low-rate, flat-tax reform.
So no wonder we're witnessing a growing tea-party revolt. I call it tea-party, free-market populism. But one-party partisan stubbornness in Washington just won't listen to it. Democrats refuse to heed the message of the polls, or the election results in Virginia, New Jersey and -- of course -- Massachusetts. They simply will not acknowledge the meaning of Scott Brown's miracle win.
...
What do I think voters want? Traditional, commonsense, center-right free enterprise, which basically says to the government, "Please, let me keep more of what I earn and, please, just leave me alone."
The time has come for our government to get out of the way, allow the American people to prosper, create wealth, build businesses and advance technology, and let the United States be the No. 1 country in the world from now until forever.
It's called optimism.
Kudlow is all about cutting marginal tax rates. He is not Keynesian, he does not believe in funneling a bunch of money to the public sector to stimulate growth. Give me a break.
As I have said before, sure if there’s a Kudlow versus Schumer, I would definitely prefer a Kudlow win.Yeah he seems like he “get’s it” in so far as he is still a Democrat and would likely be running as a Democrat not a Republican. Which you’d have to wonder, if he was so conservative, why would he remain a Democrat?
You missed my retraction. I saw “Kudlow” and read “Krugman.” I was totally mortified a moment later when my brain got past the “K.u...” Kudlow is an actual economist, unlike Krugman who is a quasi socialist who uses economic sounding spurious arguments.
Where so you get that he is a demonRAT? If he is, he is a DINO. There is no way the dems would accept him in their party.
I have just assumed that the people trying to draft him to take on Schumer are Pubs. Do you have a link to set me straight?
in 1976 he worked on the U.S. Senate campaign of Daniel Patrick Moynihan along with Tim Russert against Conservative Party incumbent James L. Buckley, brother of William F. Buckley, Jr.
The very same wiki page mentions his time in the Reagan administration, and goes on to mention his guest editorials for NRO. Give me a real link.
Are the guys who are trying to draft him really wanting to run him against Schumer in the primary? I cannot imagine any demonRAT who would be motivated to replace poster child Schumer.
Come up with a real link or impose a penalty on yourself that make people like me think you are serious about posting real information.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.